Maskelii.— On Coccididee. 241 



Subdivision MONOPHLEBID^J. 



Hitherto a distinctive character of this subdivision has 

 been a ten- or eleven-jointed antenna in the adult female. One 

 of the insects about to be described shows only seven joints, 

 and yet is certainly adult. It will therefore be necessary to 

 modify the foregoing character, and to say " antennas oi usually 

 eleven joints." 



Genus Colostoma, Maskell. 



It has been pointed out to me that the name Colostoma 

 was appropriated by others before I used it for a Coccid genus 

 in 1879 — first, by McLeay, in " Annulosa Javanica," 1825, 

 and again by Brulle in 1835. The number of names required 

 nowadays for genera and species is so great that no little in- 

 genuity is necessary to invent one which nobody has ever used 

 before. Duplication is, of course, to be avoided as much as 

 possible. Still, when one considers that not much confusion 

 is likely to result supposing that the same name were taken, 

 say, for a genus of fishes and for a genus of insects, it would 

 not seem necessary for an entomologist to alter his work in 

 order not to collide with an ichthyologist. Certainly it would 

 not do to cumber entomology with duplicate names ; and in a 

 paper of mine in 1884 (Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. xvii., p. 17) I 

 drew attention to the necessity of removing the name " Cher- 

 mes " or " Kcrmes " from the Aphiclidce, and confining it to its 

 proper family, the Coccids, and I proposed for the former the 

 name Kcrmaphis. Consequently, if there is any certainty as 

 to the priority, the name of Colostoma must be given up as 

 regards Coccids. 



However, I find, in the first place, that McLeay's name 

 (which I suppose must have been given to some Coleopter) is 

 not Colostoma, but Colostomies. So, at least, Mr. T. D. 

 Cockerell informs me in a letter. If this be so I do not feel 

 inclined to abandon a name which is not only quite expressive 

 and apt, but has been undisturbed for thirteen years ; the 

 difference of termination is sufficient for clearness, and might 

 easily be paralleled in other instances. As regards Brulle's 

 name, which seems clearly to have been Ccelostoma, I find that 

 it was attached to a Coleopterous genus which subsequently was 

 merged in Cyclonotum (see the synopsis of genera in Westwood, 

 Introd. to Mod. Class, of Insects, vol. ii.) ; consequently no 

 further notice need be taken of it. Under these circumstances 

 I venture to think that less confusion will arise for students of 

 Coccids, and even for other entomologists, if my name Ccelo- 

 stoma be still retained. 



Coelostoma immane, Maskell. N.Z. Trans., vol. xxiv., 1891, 

 p. 49. 



Mr. A. S. Olliff informs me that he has seen specimens of 

 16 



